MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4246578724 · doi:10.22215/etd/2018-13175

Reducing Energy Consumption in Residential Buildings: The Impacts of Occupant Behaviour and Engaging Control Systems

2018· dissertation· en· W4246578724 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrew A. Hicks

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEnergy consumptionConsumption (sociology)Greenhouse gasArchitectural engineeringControl (management)Energy (signal processing)Efficient energy useHome automationEnvironmental economicsZero-energy buildingEngineeringBuilding automationComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, buildings account for 35% of energy consumption and hold the largest opportunity for reducing energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.Occupant engagement poses one of the best solutions to reducing building energy consumption, with studies showing annual energy consumption can vary by up to 150% between active and passive occupants.In this thesis, an occupant-in-the-loop smart home energy system is designed and tested to explore how such systems can reduce building energy consumption through automation and occupant engagement.Simulation studies and a 125-participant survey were conducted to understand how to engage occupants to take action and their impact on home energy consumption.Insights from these studies were used to develop the smart home control system and reinforce design decisions.Testing results show 250 kWh of plug-load energy reduction and reinforce this projects conclusion that occupant-in-the-loop smart home energy systems can provide energy savings and increased occupant energy awareness/engagement. I'd like to thank my thesis supervisors Professors Liam O'Brien and Scott Bucking for their support during my research journey.Their ability to provide direction and encouragement while also allowing me to be creative and lead my own research, was of tremendous value to me.They are role models for what it means to be great mentors and supervisors.I'd also like to thank my colleague Dr. Mohamed Ouf who provided guidance and support throughout my research.This project was made possible by the team at Windmill Developments who allowed me access to data on their new Zibi development, including energy systems and building design information on specific residential buildings.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization→French-language works237,207→